SynthesisDrug design, development and therapy2015
The efficacy and safety of panitumumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis from five randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Drug design, development and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Chemotherapy plus Panitumumab Versus Chemotherapy plus Bevacizumab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2018Pooled it
- Molecular Targeting of EGFR, BRAF, and HER2 Signaling in Colorectal Cancer: Contemporary Advances with Panitumumab, Encorafenib, and Tucatinib.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- The differences in the assessments of side effects at an oncology outpatient clinic.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
- Onivyde for the therapy of multiple solid tumors.OncoTargets and therapy · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe efficacy of adding panitumumab to chemotherapy remains controversial in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Thus, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of this combination regimen in patients with mCRC.
methodsThe PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that estimated the efficacy of panitumumab with or without chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with mCRC. Hazard ratio (HR), risk ratio (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and heterogeneity was tested using I (2) statistics.
resultsFour studies involving a total of 3,066 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The addition of panitumumab to chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR =0.84, 95% CI =0.78-0.91, P=0.000) and the objective response rate (ORR) (RR =2.18, 95% CI =1.13-4.22, P=0.021) compared to chemotherapy alone, but no effect was noted on overall survival (OS) (HR =0.97, 95% CI =0.89-1.05, P=0.402). Subgroup analysis based on KRAS gene status revealed that the combined therapy significantly improved PFS (HR =0.71, 95% CI =0.57-0.88, P=0.002) and ORR (RR =2.43, 95% CI =1.21-4.90, P=0.013) in patients with wild-type KRAS tumors. Irinotecan-based chemotherapy plus panitumumab significantly prolonged PFS in patients with mCRC (HR =0.84, 95% CI =0.76-0.94, P=0.002). The combined treatment also increased the incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events.
conclusionThis meta-analysis indicates that the combination of panitumumab and chemotherapy effectively improved PFS and ORR, but it did not prolong OS. However, as the number of studies in the meta-analysis was limited, more large-scale, better-designed RCTs are needed to assess the combination of panitumumab and chemotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.